You might be right. It's hard to tell just from videos and TV. I just like the way Agassi strokes the ball a slight bit more than the way Djokovic does. I guess I just need to watch more videos.

I've seen Agassi and Djokovic live. Agassi hit harder and played from 10-15 feet closer in. Djokovic has more mobility and hits better on the stretch which he'd be doing a lot of in a match against a prime Agassi. I'd still pick Djoko to win a majority of their matches on grass and clay, but, I'd go with Agassi on hard court.

well, its not that any of the others are on 4/5 of the lists, is there ?

Btw that statement of mine was made half-jokingly ..... as clueless kiki thinks Laver should be on the top or near the top of every single list that ever existed in tennis .....

IMO Laver is #1 in overall athleticism, hitting on the run from both wings and 1hb's. He's probably top 5 in all backhands as well. In other respects, he may not be top 5, but, he's close. Even his serve, which became a bit erratic as he got older (back problems that he didn't talk about), was one of the best in the game in his prime. That balance and lack of any weaknesses was Laver's biggest strength.

IMO Laver is #1 in overall athleticism, hitting on the run from both wings and 1hb's. He's probably top 5 in all backhands as well. In other respects, he may not be top 5, but, he's close. Even his serve, which became a bit erratic as he got older (back problems that he didn't talk about), was one of the best in the game in his prime. That balance and lack of any weaknesses was Laver's biggest strength.

Laver had an excellent all-round game. But tbh, I wouldn't put at the very top in any category ...athleticism and hitting on the run from both wings , I'd easily put nadal and borg ahead for starters ....

Flink is a newcomer and a second rate tennis journalist.This list is completely ridiculous.It is biassed and only rates last 15 or 20 years players.LMAO¡¡¡

Wow!...how quickly you turn against Flink just because you didn't like his list. We once had a few discussion about the Tennis Channel 100 greatest list, and you mentioned Flink was one of the tennis experts you respect.

Laver had an excellent all-round game. But tbh, I wouldn't put at the very top in any category ...athleticism and hitting on the run from both wings , I'd easily put nadal and borg ahead for starters ....

I'm just going by what I've had the privilege to see up close and live. Nadal and Borg are/were great athletes, but, neither could hit on the stretch like Laver because of Laver's Conti grip and wristy stroke production. Further, neither of them played with the all out intensity that Laver did. He was in a class by himself in that respect. He did things that made observers in the stands look at each other like WTF. I also insist that he had the greatest 1hb of all time, and his return game was right up there. Agassi and Connors were probably a shade above because their stroke production was shorter and simpler. Volleys above the net, no one crushed them like Laver did. Anyway, I'm not going to change anyone's mind. I'm just describing my personal experience.

Laver had an excellent all-round game. But tbh, I wouldn't put at the very top in any category ...athleticism and hitting on the run from both wings , I'd easily put nadal and borg ahead for starters ....

You never watched Laver, neither Borg.Keep talking BS

__________________
Whenever I walk in a London street, I am always so careful where I put my feet

Wow!...how quickly you turn against Flink just because you didn't like his list. We once had a few discussion about the Tennis Channel 100 greatest list, and you mentioned Flink was one of the tennis experts you respect.

I read some book from him.He was not at all - and probably never will be- a respected journalist from the technical point of view.He is more a chronicle journalist, a guy that grasps in the locker rooms and is well informed about the news and the insides.I respect him as a journalist but not as a tennis expert.

anyway, you never watched Laver,Rosewall and many others from the start of the open era ( and 70´s and 80´s too).So, what should you know?

__________________
Whenever I walk in a London street, I am always so careful where I put my feet

I've watched plenty of their matches, borg even more so ..... but then keep up your delusional thinking that anyone who doesn't put your crush Laver at #1 in every aspect of tennis hasn't watched tennis in that era ....

It's a great testament to Laver though, that he's only on two lists yet still the one many think is the best who ever played the game.

Flink has Laver as the #3 greatest player of all time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kiki

Yes, you are right.But there are many Laver haters on TT, you know, and abmk is one of the biggest.He has the problem that, as much a Fed worshipper he is, he is not THAT DUMMY not to see his hero is still 3 Grand Slams away from the queenslander.

No, he's no Fed worshipper because he once said Sampras at his best beat Fed as his best. And like I said, he has Laver as #3 so I don't know why you are upset. Some experts have Laver much lower than #3.

I've seen Agassi and Djokovic live. Agassi hit harder and played from 10-15 feet closer in. Djokovic has more mobility and hits better on the stretch which he'd be doing a lot of in a match against a prime Agassi. I'd still pick Djoko to win a majority of their matches on grass and clay, but, I'd go with Agassi on hard court.